(first posted 4/23/2013. Updated and expanded 3/26/2017) It’s an issue that has bugged me for way to many decades: why did the 1959 Lark and 1960 Valiant have such similar front ends? There’s the vee’d and inset grille, the low-set lights with eyebrows over them that wrapped around and continued along the side; and the finely-textured mesh grille itself. And it’s not just the front end alone either; some design similarities can be seen in their rear ends too. And finally, I have an answer, thanks to Rob Moore, a Studebaker historian who clued me in: it was design theft. But who stole from whom?
Duncan McRae was given a very modest budget to transform Studebaker’s moribund 1957-1958 sedans into a “new” compact for 1959. It was a semi-desperate gamble, and one that paid of surprisingly well, generating profits for Studebaker the likes of which it hadn’t seen in way too long.
The main task was to drastically reduce the front and rear lengths of the Commander body. That may have been the easy part. But the Lark needed a fresh new face, as well as rear end. This body dated back to 1953, and was generally very out of date.
Here’s where the story gets interesting. Rob Moore, a devoted Studebaker historian, sent me this:
One of the magazines we get talked about the styling of the first Lark. Duncan McCrae was the Studebaker stylist. But the secret is out. Really what happened:
Duncan McCrae had his team create three proposals for the Lark in Clay. None were all that inspiring, according to Del Coates a Studebaker designer. In the article/interview, he recounts the story of how he and Bob Doehler, another Studebaker designer had each created one of the three Lark model proposals. Doehler’s design was very Mercedes inspired. One of the three were to be selected by McCrae for production.
One late evening, Coates and Bob Doerhle were called into a room with Duncan MacCrea and a fourth man, a person from Chrysler on a job interview for Studebaker. The designer brought with him, the Valiant designs. Doerhler and Coates were each given 5 minutes to study the photos and drawings. That was it, the guy didn’t get hired, but Studebaker set out to copy the design that Coates and McCrae and Doerhler viewed and memorized the best they could. So that’s the story.
In essence, Virgil Exner leaked some style elements from the Valiant through his son, who was consulting with Studebaker. McCrae took those elements and stuck them on the Lark. Look at the grill and the Valiant. Look at the headlight eyebrows on the Lark. Then look at the Valiant.
Of course, Studebaker’s Hawk had been using a somewhat similar grille shape for a couple of years but its integration in the front end was totally different.
And realistically, the Hawk’s grille was just another Chrysler/Exner imitation, given how Exner had pioneered the return of the classic grille back in 1953 with his Chrysler Ghia D’Elegance. For that matter, the Valiant’s low-set headlights and eyebrows are quite fully on display here already too. It was not that big a jump from this front end to the Valiant’s.
This really does help explain how Duncan McRae came up with such a successful design, and a rather forward-looking one at that. Keep in mind that the Lark essentially pioneered headlights in a lower position on the front, unlike up on the peaks of the fenders, along the 1959 GM cars also pioneered it, and the 1960 Corvair popularized in Europe and the rest of the world. I’d long wondered how McRae was able to be in the vanguard of this significant new wave of design, and now we know. As Bob said: designers were one big fraternity.
It’s also significant to note how the Lark’s sides and rear end treatment bear some very decided resemblance to the Corvair’s, with that well defined line just below the belt, the rear tail light position, and the smooth flanks. Seems like there was likely a bit of fraternal interaction with the guys at GM too. If the Lark’s chrome character line/trim had been contiguous and not humped up like that, it would have been too obvious.
More: CC 1959 Studebaker Lark: Studebaker’s Last Hurrah PN
I have heard more than one person say that the Lark coupe was like a smaller version of the 57+ 300s clearly the origin of that style grille. It makes sense, given the impact that the 57 Chryslers had on styling that it would perk up on an independent like Studebaker.
Both the Exners, of all people, should have figured that turnabout is fair play, particularly when Studebaker was involved!
Exner was part of the Raymond Loewy team that worked on the 1947 Studebaker, which was ultimately the first postwar design from a manufacturer that had been around prior to World War II. Loewy was officially a consultant to Studebaker.
Loewy didn’t get along with some Studebaker executives, and Exner didn’t like the way Loewy took public credit for his staff’s designs.
One of the Studebaker executives set Exner up in a secret studio to work on the 1947 Studebaker – while he was still officially employed by Loewy!
Loewy discovered this, and fired Exner. But the final 1947 Studebaker design accepted by management was the Loewy proposal (which Exner had worked on from the start) with a blunt front designed by Exner.
Exner’s rejected ’46 Studebaker design was “loaned” to Ford for the ’49 model.
This car reminds me the Peugeot 403 a bit.
GM apparently stole the design as well, just a little later.
LOLROFL good one, tell another!
Not likely.Look at Studebaker styling compare the Hawk to the Lark.Its obvious That the inspiration for the Lark is the Hawk.All car companies used styling elements from their “halo”cars to create family resemblance.Furthermore look at the concept drawings for the shared Packard,Clipper, Studebaker the proposed all new 57 Studebaker would have had all these design elements.These drawings go back to 1955! All Studebaker did was Shrink the proposed design to fit the Lark “package” No doubt the Chrysler stylists and Studebaker guys talked.I speculate the Chrysler guys said “Holy crap that looks like what we’re doing” And Studebaker said “well let’s see”Then management decided we’re not starting over build it anyway it’s not “That”close.
I love that story. Always thought it was echoing Mercedes, which was sold alongside the Lark.
They even did an ad about the grille in ’59, that I just posted on the Lark CC.
The Mercedes look seems to have really come about in 1963. It wasn’t just a freshening of the grille (and making it protrude a bit more a la Benz); it was also a revision of the greenhouse that carries some of the same design themes of the Heckflosse (Fintail) Mercedes:
Design-theft quibbles aside (seems like Exner and Loewy had a long history of swiping each other’s ideas for whatever company they happened to be working at the time), that ’59 Lark hardtop is a fine looking auto, particularly when put up against what else came from the Big 3 the same year. If not for the stiff compact competition that would arrive from Detroit the following year, the Terror from South Bend might have lasted a little longer.
But as nice as the Lark was, it would be tough for anyone to buy one in 1960 when the alternatives were a sporty Corvair, frugal Falcon, or slant-six Valiant.
The Lark in 1960 was seen as a new car by the punters just like the untried Falcon Valiant and Corvair and of the 3 its by far not the worst. There is no anecdotal evidence of Studebaker Larks disintegrating from being driven over tram lines and potholes like the falcon so would it have been a bad choice, The Valiant had unusual looks but it was a good car, the Corvair I hear was ok for a 6 cylinder VW. Other 6cylinder compacts around the world either didnt sell in the US or had a bad rep so the Studebaker was probavly a good choice.
Yes, the Falcons had very poor build quality and suspensions. In Australia they were “Foul-Cans”. It took awhile for Americans to realize how superior the Mopars were, especially to the Falcon.
Amazing. When these came out, I was 7, and I thought they were both Studebakers (we’d previously had a studebaker, so that was significant to me), and I loved them, although I loved the Valiant more. In fact, this Valiant remains my all time favorite piece of automotive style (well, along with the Peugeot 404, but that one has big sentimental reasons). The head of MIT daycamp had a Valiant wagon, and one day, to my great joy, he gave my brother and me a ride home.
Next question: why does the Kia Amanti look like this Valiant mated with a modern Mercedes?
I always thought that the Amanti looked like a miniature Town Car with a Lark front end.
Every car or truck on the American road has a logo either on the nose or in the grille. Take a look next time you’re walking through a long parking lot. It’s as if it’s a Federal requirement.
Except the Kia Amanti, which has no branding anywhere except the back. It’s like a kid in a new suit slipping into a posh party uninvited.
Normally every vehicle ever created turns up here in New Zealand at some stage. Except the Amanti, for which we are eternally grateful.
Right on schedule, I saw one of these Amantis on the way into work this morning…
Kind of like Ford did in the early 80’s with the blue oval, or the bowtie on the Caprice’s of the same era, nowhere to be found (until ’86 when it showed up on the steering wheel center). Makes me think it’s an attempt to go upscale and hide your roots..
I’d often thought industrial espionage was rife in the US car industry during the golden era of the mid 50s to 1970.The Valiant and Falcon were the winners in the sales war,could it be that it was a lot easier to find a Ford or Mopar dealer than a Studebaker one?Growing up in the 60s in the UK I saw lots of Falcons and Valiants, and 2 Larks.
Ford and Chrysler-Plymouth did have stronger dealer networks, but Studebaker also suffered from the fact that the punters knew the company was in a shaky position and had been for several years. Buyers are not terribly enthusiastic about buying cars from a company that seems not long for the world, given the implications for dealer service, spare parts availability and residuals.
It seems ironic that this was the perception in light of the fact that Studebaker parts were (and are) still widely available after the death of the car-producing division of the Studebaker Corporation…
A lot of Studebaker dealers were one or two man shows operating out of gas stations and other similar sized buildings, They might have one or at most two new cars on the premises, most of cars they sold were on an order basis.
Studebaker NOS parts availability for restorers and hobbyists are on a scale that other car collectors of GM’s, Ford’s, Mopar’s and AMC’s can only dream about. When Studebaker shut down US operations there warehouses and the factory filled to the brim with parts waiting to be assembled into cars. This inventory was sold to third parties for peanuts rather than being destroyed as the case of other American auto makers. Only 20 years after they were built were the frames for the Avanti’s used up. The frame on a 1985 Avanti II is basically the same as the frame of a 1953 Studebaker and was built before 1965. Gives you an idea of the NOS parts supply for Studebaker and the fact that the same parts were used for decades, not 3,4 or 5 years like other auto makers. This is a generalization but is basically true
Interesting. I never made the connection between the looks of the Lark and the Valiant, though the rear deck is quite a bit different save the taillights. I prefer the quad-headlight Larks to the 1959-60 version with only duals. Of course, now those look even more like a Valiant to me!
The missing piece here is that McRae himself said the Lark’s front end was influenced by contemporary Lancias. I don’t know if Exner Sr. felt the same about Lancia (although he would certainly have been aware of them), but the Lark does in some ways a melding of the series 2 and series 3 Lancia Appia. Also, compare the Valiant to the Touring-designed Lancia Flaminia GT. I don’t remember when the Touring coupe was introduced (1959?), so it may not have appeared until after the Valiant was already locked, but the front ends do look similar.
Hmmm….I don’t see it. Series 3 has roughly the same grille shape but no eyebrows. Methinks Mr. McRae needed a cover story 😉
Series 2 Appia rocks (from jancia.eu).
PS: Another Studebaker day is a treat, thanks guys!
Ditto. The lower headlights and eyebrows are the key distinguishing (and new) feature. The grille had been around on the Hawks for several years.
With all due respect, I’m skeptical about Rob Moore’s “design-theft” theory. Studebaker had already developed a very similar “slant-eye” rear for the all-new 1957 redesign that then-CEO James Nance had failed to find funding for. Meanwhile, the Lark’s front end was merely a more upright version of the Hawk, which was still the brand’s halo car.
I also think that Paul is reaching to argue that the Lark “pioneered” lower-placed headlights given that for 1959 the Edsel, Chevrolet, Pontiac and Oldsmobile shared that look and by 1960 virtually everyone else would follow. Studebaker had merely joined the lemming leap in progress.
In addition, Moore states that Duncan McRae worked with Brooks Stevens on the Sceptre concept car. Really? Richard Langworth, in, “Studebaker 1946-66,” states that McRae had long since taken a job with Ford because Studebaker CEO Harold Churchill had refused to consider his facelift proposals for the 1959 Lark.
McRae was replaced by Randy Faurot, who was later pushed aside when Sherwood Egbert became CEO in 1961. As previously mentioned, at the eleventh hour Egbert unplugged Faurot’s major redesign of the 1962 Lark in favor of a facelift done by Stevens. Only after that was finished did Stevens develop the Sceptre as a replacement for the Gran Turismo Hawk, circa 1966.
Am I challenging the idea that Detroit was one big fraternity? Nope. I’d just like to see more factual support for the design-theft theory.
Yes, Studebaker did steal the design of the Valiant for the Lark. It’s documented in the December issue of “Collectable Automobile” magazine in the USA. It was one big fraternity, Here’s the data on the Valiant and Lark similarities and Studebaker’s theft.
Duncan McCrae had his team create three proposals for the Lark in Clay. None all that inspiring according to Del Coates a Studebaker designer. In the article/interview, he recounts the story of how he and Bob Doehler, another Studebaker designer had each created one of the three Lark model proposals. Doehler’s design was very Mercedes inspired. One of the three were to be selected by McCrae for production.
One late evening, Coates and Bob Doerhle were called into a room with Duncan MacCrea and a fourth man, a person from Chrysler on a job interview for Studebaker. The designer brought with him, the Valiant designs. Doerhler and Coates were each given 5 minutes to study the photos and drawings. That was it, the guy didn’t get hired, but Studebaker set out to copy the design that Coates and McCrae and Doerhler viewed and memorized the best they could. So that’s the story.
No the front grille is Hawk the eyebrows were just design trends in 59 nearly everybody had them.And the rear was a direct reincarnation of the aborted 57 Studebaker. But also who would believe Studebaker was hiring designers in 58?
I think the ’59 Lark is one of the nicest cars of its era or any other for that matter. Of course i really love Studebakers.
I’ve talked to Virgil Exner Jr. about the work he did with Studebaker, and he confirmed that the ’59 Lark was borrowing rather heavily from the Valiant. I think the Lark-Valiant connection is even more obvious when you look at the ’64 Studes with the redesigned front grille–there’s definitely some Valiant going on there.
The 67 Chevy pickup had front end styling much like the 66 Studebaker.
We had the 60 Valient. My mom took electrical tape and spelled out “UGLY” on the fake tire cover on the trunk lid. Chrysler stock took a plunge the day the Valient was debuted as buyers on the stock market thought the car was so ugly that it would put Chrysler out of business. In reality, the Valient was a great car. The seats were very comfortable and the unibody design was years ahead of the rest. The structure served as the basis for A body mopars for years to come.
I do not see any great credit or discredit for either model (Lark or Valiant) in the superficial similarity of design themes, since the masses and proportions of the two cars proceded in different directions. The Lark by necessity of legacy “hard points” and the Valiant by extroverted goofiness. The face of the Valiant was the only good aspect of it. The elements of two or four headlights and a shield shape radiator opening and a bumper beneath could only end up in one or two ways even if the designers had worked in a vacuum. Removing the overhang of the earlier Studebaker meant the prow would be tall and blunt, leading to the way the opening was inset. A relaxation of legal height of the headlamps allowed them to be sited elsewhere than the top of the fenders. Bingo, the face of the Lark.
Thank you for your Brilliant Deduction…
The Valiant Chassis (Hard Points) I think was designed / engineered
for the larger A Body Cars to come,
used because Chrysler had to save money by cutting down the size
for the Valiant compact. Awkward exterior Design resulted.
Look at 1962 Dodge or Plymouth downsize for confirmation of this.
A Chicken or the Egg situation, but it worked!
No, the Valiant chassis was not designed or engineered for the larger A-body cars to come. That just plain didn’t happen; you’re makin’ it up, and the ’62 Plymouth-Dodge cars don’t confirm it.
Behold the all-new 1988-’89 Plyncoln Concclaim. Don’t just squint at the thumbnail, click to embiggen and really see it.
I think that’s what a stereotype American car looks like. Interestingly, the Lincoln has a Polish plate.
Both cars are kind of rare these days, but I still see them roughly once a week
Love ’embiggen’! 🙂
It’s a perfectly cromulent word.
EDIT: XR7Matt beat me to it! D’oh!
That’s a cromulent observation
Not to mention:
From the back I actually see 1961 Plymouth more than Corvair, which goes with the story. It’s possible that design may have been among the drawings as well.
The ’61 Plymouth would not have been anywhere near close to being finished in 1957, when this happened. More like the other way around. And likely the influence of the Corvair.
What goes around, comes around…
Yeah but the Valiant came out only one year earlier, it’s quite possible that some of those sketches may have included what would eventually be the 61 Plymouth, or possibly that rear end was explored for the Valiant to begin with, and when the 61 Plymouths were definned from the 60 the Valiant design was recycled and scaled up for it. Either way it fits the story. I mean I see some Corvair, but the concave sides and spear shaped taillight bulges leading up to the lens just seem too big to be coincidence, the Corvair is really nothing like that.
There were a few cars before the Lark where the headlamps were at least sinking almost to grille level and no longer above it. The ’56 Rambler and ’57 Imperial come to mind (the ’59 Imperial had the lights fully flanking the grille). Studebaker was a year ahead of GM in flattening their roofs too in ’58 as the pre-shrunken Stude shown here (except the wagon which had to wait until ’59). They were desperate to make the 1953-vintage body look lower and sleeker, so the flattened roof along with smaller wheels and tires made the ’58s about 2-1/2″ lower than the ’57s. The new-for-’58 GM lineup still had tall bulbous roofs that curved several inches above the top of the door openings.
McRae (isn’t that how his name is spelled?) also did the ’58 Stude facelift, which clearly was designed to make their cars look even more like GM’s with a big chrome wraparound grille, new quad headlamps (awkwardly tacked onto the previous year’s fenders), new tail fins (ditto) and detached-letter nameplates, anything to make them look longer, lower, and chromier. Amazing he could so totally reverse course a year later.
Bought a ’62 V-8 with overdrive and twin-traction with the idea to eventually use it as a parts car for a Hawk. Delightful to drive, plenty of power and easy on gas too. Parts generally easy to get and cheap. Great car for an inexpensive restoration since there’s not so much chrome as other cars of the era – everything easy to work on. The V-8 really set Lark apart from other early compacts. Only drawback for me is the dumpy looks. Never got around to buying a that Hawk.
Just today had a rare sighting.
I saw a Lark p/u truck parked in a campground near home. My guess a 60/62 model.
Looked great in a semi dark green color with dog dish caps and chrome beauty rings surrounded by wide whites with a spare wheel mounted on passenger side of the bed. X-lent redone to orig. look, the interior was redone in a saddle tan color. It might have a v8, it did have a nice set of dual pipes and a Genie floor shifter with only 2 pedals.
The bed was also done with oak and rhino hide side panels added for protection…
Did not see the owner to chat with, he might have been fishing for Trout in the White river very close by ?
The almost revival
Tank Gawd that the Valiant drove SO MUCH better than the Lark did!
I STILL have the urge for a 1960/61 Valiant.
My desire for a Lark was never much at all.
They are good cars. I had a ’61 Valiant when it was just a few years old. It was white and unfortunately in a major snowstorm a plow driver failed to notice that it was buried in a snowdrift and that was the end of that.
I’m generally more disposed to the independents when it comes to classics. The Valiant though was the cream of the crop for the early 1960s American compacts despite some dodgy styling. Although not without their own charms, the circa 1960 Rambler American or Studebaker Lark were from the stone age in comparison.
If I had been forced to choose between the Valiant and Lark in 1960, based on styling, I would have shot myself.
I think the Lark looks okay. The Valiant is lumpy and has about eight different things going on at the same time.
Smaller on the outside bigger on the inside between the 1985 small Cadillac and the Lark and Valiant rings a bell because it is the same idea from K. T. Keller on the 1949 Plymouth Platform it’s similar.
I always thought the ’59 and ’60 Larks were the best and purest designs and that is why i created 43rd scale models of them using the Brooklin 2 door sedan as a donor car. The ’61 moved the side molding off the body crease which was a mistake in my opinion.
The Lark styling was inspired more by the work of Brooks Stevens than that of Virgil Exner. Design Patents issued to both in the 1950s bear this out. Unfortunately the Exners, like Alex Tremulis, were not averse to self-inflation of reputation. The older they got, the more larger their contributions and influence of their earlier works became…